From: Dark King (DARKKING) [#6] 7 Feb 13:04 To: Steve (CERAZED) [#5] 7 Feb 13:28
That's exactly what John Howard was in 1996, right before he toppled the Labor Government that had been in power for 13 years.
Old government, with too much history and a great deal of unpopularity...all the Opposition needs to do is avoid looking like the government and they get in by default.
Democracy. Where 1000 morons are deemed to be smarter than 1 genius.
From: Ceb (MADRASMAN) [#7] 8 Feb 10:40 To: [LST]Al (AL) [#1] 9 Feb 19:55
Despite the fact that if all goes to plan I won't be living in this country beyond the end of the year, the thought of Gordon Brown in charge of this place for another five years makes me physically sick.
Cameron to me is no worse that Blair was back in 97. Hardly a ringing endorsement I know, and the Tory candidate for my area looks like a smarmy bastard and his stance on the Northern Line is in direct contradiction to my views, and I'm old enough to remember the car crash Tory government of the early 90s (I'm also old enough to remember everyone remembering the car crash Labour government of the 70s), but they still unquestioningly have my vote.
Because Gordon Brown is a cunt. A massive, dry, cracked, herpes-sored, warty cunt. Just the kind that Jez goes for.
From: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#10] 10 Feb 12:53 To: [LST]Al (AL) [#2] 10 Feb 23:14
He's undoubtably a fuckwit, but not a bigger one that Brown/the entire New Labour front bench.
What amuses me is the best anyone can manage to say about NL at the moment is "they aren't as bad as the Tories will be". Come on, really? Firstly, is that even true and secondly, if all you can say about a party is that they aren't as bad as someone you consider to be evil incarnate, shouldn't you be finding another party?
From: [LST]Al (AL) [#11] 10 Feb 23:19 To: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#10] 11 Feb 2:03
I want another party. I'll probably vote Lib *spit* Dem at this election. Regardless of how bad Labour are, in their some-what incompetent financial handling, the Orwellian police state privacy invasion and their current raping of higher education, especially Science (caused by them deciding that higher education for every dim witted fucknut was great idea), I could never vote Tory. I am something of a socialist liberal. The heart of the Conservative party does not want people like me. If it did, it would no longer be conservative.
From: Dark King (DARKKING) [#12] 10 Feb 23:20 To: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#10] 11 Feb 2:03
I may have been politically innocent when Thatcher was in power, but her record speaks for itself.
Her economic reforms - deregulation at every turn - was pretty much the direct cause of the economic meltdown the UK suffered in 2008. Of course it wasn't the only cause; Reagan's identical (to all intents and purposes) economic policies at the time caused the US meltdown which in turn triggered the British collapse.
Not convinced? Check out Canada and Australia. Neither country had to bail out any of their banks, unemployment rose but not to a great degree...and Australia has recovered to the point where the Reserve Bank is raising interest rates again to keep inflation under control. All a result of not embracing the "government has no role in the financial markets" dogma that Thatcher and Reagan preached.
Then there was Thatcher's rather "direct" foreign policy, which resulted in a pointless war with Argentina and a less than satisfactory end to the Cold War (a more conciliatory approach to Gorbachev in the late 80s could have produced a much better outcome). People laud her for being "strong", but diplomacy could have achieved a great deal.
So much for Thatcher's record. And where do the Tories stand on Homosexual Rights? Climate Change? Women's Rights? Oh, and those are actual questions - haven't seen a policy statement on any of those from Cameron.
From: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#13] 11 Feb 12:20 To: [LST]Al (AL) [#11] 11 Feb 20:10
I will most likely vote Lib Dem too, unless the polls are showing a smaller lead between Labour and Conservative, in which case I'll feel obliged to vote Tory. Sadly, before I can put any positive ideological statement at the top of my list of priorities, I feel we must comprehensively eject the current government.
From: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#14] 11 Feb 12:38 To: Dark King (DARKKING) [#12] 12 Feb 11:23
I don't think you can really say those things without some major qualification. Her economic reforms may have played a significant role in the recession the UK suffered further down the line, but suggesting a 'direct cause' in the recent disasters is madness. There is a global recession, which even card carrying communists can't blame on Thatcher with a straight face.
More to the point, you ignore the necessity for changes in that direction at the time she was in power - the UK was an absolute mess during the late 1970s and much of what she did, she didn't choose to do. It was simply the application of demands passed on from the IMF and World Bank, in order for the country to continue securing funds from them.
I'm also not in agreement on the matter of the Falklands, since I can't quite get my head around what other options you have when another country invades your territory and claims it for their own.
But all of that is an aside. Saying "don't vote Tory because of how Thatcher turned out" is like saying "don't go to eastern Germany because it's Soviet". And for your questions:
Climate Change - they want to push for Britain to become the first 'low carbon economy'. They have fairly strong policies backing microgeneration, offshore wind and tidal, and want to modernise the grid. Sadly, nearly everything that gets said about this these days is total waffle anyway, so no party is really making particularly positive statements about it.
Gay Rights - pretty much in line with the other parties, in a practical sense at the moment. It has come quite a long way, even in the last 10 years.
Women's Rights - I believe they're asking Mary Wollstonecraft to do some campaigning for them. But seriously, what the hell are you on about?
From: Dark King (DARKKING) [#15] 12 Feb 11:31 To: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#14] 12 Feb 12:48
Thatcher's economic reforms went too far in favour of deregulation. Of course, John Major and Tony Blair continued down the same road...but Thatcher was the British leader who started the whole process. The same deal is true in the USA - Reagan started the process that lead to the 2008 crash, even if Bush, Clinton and Bush were all complicit in continuing that process.
As for the Falklands - the best way to deal with that was to never allow Argentina to invade in the first place. How, do you ask? By not withdrawing the garrison, for starters. Sending a couple of nuclear powered submarines down there would have helped as well...just like it did in the 1970s (when Argentina's military dictators were making noises about invading the Falklands).
In short, Thatcher was warned repeatedly that drawing down the military presence in the Falklands would trigger an Argentinian invasion and she ignored it all. Then when the invasion happened, she used it as a propaganda coup while those that had issued the earlier warnings were turned into scapegoats.
Regarding women's rights - I have to ask that, as the local version of the Conservative Party (bizarrely called the Liberal Party) has been hijacked by a bunch of religious zealots (hardcore Catholic as party leader, local party is run by an ultra-conservative Calvinist). They made at least one attempt to limit access to abortions and birth control while they were government (fortunately the female MPs of all parties bitch-slapped them into silence). I hope Cameron isn't of the same ilk, as that style of politician wants to chain women to the kitchen again.
From: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#16] 12 Feb 13:24 To: Dark King (DARKKING) [#15] 12 Feb 23:54
I quite agree they went too far, but actually it was Gordon Brown who introduced the deregulatory policies that allowed the extent of financial fuck-up we've seen recently.
Thatcher started the whole process? Well, there are two points regarding that. The first is that it appears to be a rather sudden cut-off, ignoring the entire political timeline of the late 1960s and the whole of the 1970s. You could equally move the 'start marker' back to 1975, when we started actively begging off the IMF and selling British holdings like North Sea Oil, for example.
The second is that she didn't have much choice in starting the process. The IMF was pushing hard for Britain to make significant economic changes or it would stop funding the country and we'd have gone bankrupt. There were direct demands that we cut public spending drastically and seriously curb inflation. Since practically everything of note was nationalised in 1979 and inflation was heading back up towards the 20% mark (off the top of my head, I think Thatcher inherited it at about 18%, which while not the highest it had been was still seen as unacceptable), she had to make severe, quick changes. It should also be remembered that the first cases of privitisation and deregulation were actually quite popular.
From: Dark King (DARKKING) [#17] 13 Feb 0:01 To: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#16] 13 Feb 12:51
The reforms were needed, that much is obvious. Australia went through a similar process at the same time. The problem lies in the approach - Thatcher subscribed to the same school of economics that Reagan was sold on (just one reason why the two got on so well together), which stated that total deregulation of financial markets was the ideal. Australia deregulated a bit, but kept the banks under tight control. The results can be seen today.
Do you remember the documentary "The Power of Nightmares"? The same person (Adam Curtis) has done a series of films about the history of power and economics in the 20th century. Watch "The Mayfair Set" and "The Trap" for more information - and bear in mind that he dumps on all sides of politics equally.
From: Jez (THE_HATSTAND) [#18] 17 Feb 21:57 To: Hitty McThump (CONCRETEPEANUT) [#14] 6 May 2:38
I'm just going to do the Falklands bit as there are too many bits there.
Thatcher is totally to blame for the war there. She withdraw the garrison, as DK said, but she also decommisioned the Antarctic Survey ship (a diplomatic name for a gunship equipped with icebreaking equipment). It was these two factors that directly led to the Argentinians landing on the South Sandwich Islands, hoisting the flag and then, seeing that they had no response from the UK, took the Malvinas. Her policies were directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of young men and a few old ones. For the maiming of hundreds more. For the loss of several expensive ships, helicopters, aircraft, etc.
But it's all ok as a) we won, b) we got to test out the Harrier in battle conditions, c) ditto the Rapier AAM, d) we learned to strap machine guns to ships railings and shoot at planes, e) we won and f) we have something to sing at Argentinian football teams. So it's all worth it, right?
Oh go on then - a vote for the tories is a vote for bigotry, kowtowing to the very rich, the destruction of the public services and another 4-8 years of hatred and intolerance being fostered in all walks of society. I HATE "New" Labour with a vengance, but I'll still vote for them over the evil that is the Conservatives.